On AI writing

I just wish AI was brief.

Don’t add filler words. Be straight to the point.

The painting at the bottom of the post is actually a really good representation of what is lost with readers and writers both using AI.

> When you know the writer personally, it becomes harder to see the text from the author’s perspective if you know it’s not her style.

I think this is why I absolutely hate reading AI-generated PR descriptions, Readmes or wiki entries at work. I work with these people every day, we talk to each other in meetings, but then I read perfectly formatted Slop in the freshly opened PR that has your name and picture attached to it, yet it's almost impossible for me to care about it because (subconsciously or not) i can't bring myself to see it as yours. Same or even worse for reviews.

It is interesting how despite huge and rapid advances in coding or math, AI still sucks at writing and is (mostly) obvious, at least if people are trying to pay attention. it cannot fool pangram, even though it's not clear exactly what it flags as being AI. Maybe one day AI will close the gap.

Interesting perspectives, a couple of questions that I've been pondering, and am currently curious of your perspectives on

1. It seems we are starting to see more people write like ai, is this something you have measured yet? (I never used em-dash (big fan of the parens), and I resisted for a while, re: ai, but now am trying to use them appropriately)

2. I've been reading from paper again, and my own writing style is evolving, is this too something you can/have measured?

Claude resay that as if I was a mentally challenged child (but without your dumb metaphors) using as few words as possible in your best imitation of a Human speaking casually without jargon and ...

(What it feels like to try and get a decent sentence out of my AI.)

[flagged]

[dead]